In re Jolly’s Empirical Analysis
172 F.2d 566 · 1949
Citation profile
1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently October 2010
1 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 33
Relies on General Electric Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp. · Standard Brands, Inc. v. National Grain Yeast Corp. · Koebel v. Coe · Raytheon Mfg. Co. v. Coe · In re Caunt
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * It is true, of course, that where the validity of a claim which has been granted is questioned, * * * it frequently becomes proper to interpret the claim by looking to the specification, but where one seeks a patent, the statute very definitely requires that he shall particularly point out and distinctly claim that which he claims to be his invention or discovery. No citation of authority is necessary in support of the familiar rule that the claim is the measure of the invention.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[s]o far as the time of reaction is concerned, it seems to us that all that appellant's specification teaches those skilled in the art is to experiment and find out for themselves how much time will be required where different amounts, or proportions, of nitriles and sulfur are used.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“a time sufficient to produce a substantially homogeneous product but insufficient to cause the formation of a substantial proportion of oil-insoluble reaction products.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.